Judging by his latest picture, he's going to really have to squeeze himself into it.
-
Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it.
Do not post IRL pranks here without including the source
Robinson et al v. City of Milwaukee et al
- Thread starter Cumtown Fags
- Start date
Is Fat appearing tomorrow or is it just another filing?
It's not required, but he should..
Although I'm not 100% sure whether the Judge is deciding on the matters tomorrow, or that is the start of the motions and will deliberate for a while and we get an update in about a week or so with his decision(s).
update with some clarification:
it's the deadline for parties to file motions to dismiss and other motions that would end the case.
So basically the second thing I said, deadline has passed and judge will start looking through to see what merits being dismissed. Not much will actually happen tomorrow and there will be an update at some point as to what has been dismissed and what if anything is going to trial.
Last edited:
"Plaintiff, state your full name for the record, please." - Uh, P-patri- "That's not what it says here!" - W-wha- "It clearly says FAT FAGGOT WITH BITCH TITS! THIS IS A COURT OF LAW, NOT YOUR COMEDY STAGE! SIR, DON'T DO THIS!"
This Patpost stinks. Do better
Dispositive motions are filed without a hearing. Because they've already completed discovery (or most of it), the PD and individual officers will file a motion for summary judgment as opposed to a motion to dismiss or motion for judgment on the pleadings. Pat's side will have 7 (I think - I'm not entirely sure on the deadlines in federal court) days to respond, and the PD will have 3 or 5 days from the response to file a reply. After all of that there will be a hearing, but there won't be any evidence or testimony. Summary judgment is appropriate where there are no material facts in dispute (I don't think there are here - nobody is arguing the SWATs didn't happen or that the PD didn't carry them out) and, even drawing all inferences in favor of Pat, he's not entitled to recovery as a matter of law. So, while Pat will likely attend, he won't be involved in the hearing.
My guess is that qualified immunity will be the focus of the PDs argument, and unless Pat's team has uncovered solid evidence removing that immunity, it's a very strong argument. The judge is more likely to rule against Pat now on that basis than he was before because he's given Pat an opportunity to engage in discovery and make his case. If there's nothing there now, there won't be at trial and the case can be dismissed.
I wouldn't be surprised if Pat's side filed for summary judgment as well as it is often used as a strategy (not a very good one) to make a judge more cautious when there are competing motions vs just one.
Lastly, it's extremely unlikely that Pat will be subject to an award of the PD's attorney fees. For better or worse, the US legal system only allows for fee shifting when provided for by contract (obviously not the case here) or statute (as in the Quasi matter). Exceptions are rare and require a level of egregiousness or bad faith that isn't present here. I would love to be wrong on this.
“…had my robe thrown open.”
But but Rickles, that’s assault, potentially even sexual assault. Why didn’t this detail of the strong man exposing your nethers make it into the suit??? Is it a recovered memory?
But but Rickles, that’s assault, potentially even sexual assault. Why didn’t this detail of the strong man exposing your nethers make it into the suit??? Is it a recovered memory?
Sure Pat. and everyone laughed
Lyndon spread his cheeks and then laughed at his little hog.
Sorry Mr.Tomlinson I was checking for Nazi stlakers
Sorry Mr.Tomlinson I was checking for Nazi stlakers
Y’know what I find fascinating just dropping into this thread recently?
I’m an ambulance chasing lawyer in Virginia who specializes in personal injury. I only do about 3-4 Fed cases a year. But I can tell you what personal injury firms do.
You all are operating on the false premise that Patrick’s in-laws are funding his lawsuit.
That’s not at all how it works. Personal injury attorneys ADVANCE costs and take them out of the back-end from a settlement or verdict.
While most attorneys put a provision in their employment contracts that they will collect expenses from a losing lawsuit, most do not. It’s bad form in our community to sue a losing client.
I’m an ambulance chasing lawyer in Virginia who specializes in personal injury. I only do about 3-4 Fed cases a year. But I can tell you what personal injury firms do.
You all are operating on the false premise that Patrick’s in-laws are funding his lawsuit.
That’s not at all how it works. Personal injury attorneys ADVANCE costs and take them out of the back-end from a settlement or verdict.
While most attorneys put a provision in their employment contracts that they will collect expenses from a losing lawsuit, most do not. It’s bad form in our community to sue a losing client.
Patrick is probably gonna get a nuisance /cost of litigation suit settlement. I can’t speak to fucking fat Milwaukee, but around here he’d get 25k-75k.
Not because they find anything wrong, but because it’s not worth putting a fed employee on it and arguing the horseshit.
There is little likelihood he will overcome qualified/sovereign immunity, but most firms do a cost/benefit analysis: They will pay us something to go away. Because most people are lazy.
Not because they find anything wrong, but because it’s not worth putting a fed employee on it and arguing the horseshit.
There is little likelihood he will overcome qualified/sovereign immunity, but most firms do a cost/benefit analysis: They will pay us something to go away. Because most people are lazy.
Do most law firms litigate on contingency? I've always understood it as contingency based firms essentially fire off legal correspondence in the hopes of getting settlements. If the matter goes to court, even contingency based firms start asking for retainers, right?
STFU already you stupid faggot.
I
ANAL but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of cases where the attorneys work on contingency are personal injury cases. Taking a qualified immunity case on contingency? Seems a bit farfetched
ANAL but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of cases where the attorneys work on contingency are personal injury cases. Taking a qualified immunity case on contingency? Seems a bit farfetched
The MPD has already stated they want the case to go to trial.